Yes, I am angry.
I am also disgusted.
I’d mind my own business but there’s a concerted effort to ‘infect’ our children with bad ideas. My granddaughters are going to be exposed to them too. They simply can’t go unchallenged any longer.
If I hear about “equity” anymore, I may explode. LOL
Below is a picture meant to express the ‘marvelous nature’ of “equity”. Let’s examine the messages.
Well, there are three children of different races and sexes in this diagram and an imaginary dotted line. What’s the line mean? I would guess it has something to do with reaching ‘success’. Everything presented in this diagram has a purpose. The white male child is the tallest, the female child is shorter, and the black child is too short to reach the ‘success’ line in the first picture. Oh, I see diplomas in the hands of the “successful”. Could it be the getting of a diploma is a perfect goal?
Seems odd that the taller boy can more easily reach the goal when more women are graduating with college degrees these days.
Seems repulsively racist that the diagram depicts the black child as needing help to achieve the same goal. I hope they aren’t suggesting black children are not as smart as white kids! Somebody ought to tell Dr. Ben Carson or Barrack Obama about that a.s.a.p.
The black child not only seems to need ‘help’, but he’s also depicted as needing the most help. That’s a sorry message, I hope it was not intentional. [wink]
So, when it comes to “equality” it seems giving everyone a fair “equal” chance isn’t enough but giving ‘selected people’ according to their ‘appearance’ better unequaled advantages is shown as a ‘good’ thing. Don’t forget…that ‘good’ thing is a diploma. They don’t regard (in this diagram) success as being achievable any other way. That’s okay. They can’t cram all the possible ways we achieve in only one diagram because we know they are endless, right?
Now, let’s look at the heading. “Apply Equity to Women’s Advancement”. I’ve established many reasons that “equity” is condescending and unfair. How might the application of it advance women?
What possible measurement does the artist use for “advancement”? I already said more women are getting degrees than men. I can tell you, the women I know without degrees are advancing in there “life goals” nicely too. All motivated people strive to advance themselves toward goals. I surely hope being a devoted mother and/or caregiver or an excellent free-lance writer meets that undefined (but subliminally suggestive) advancement criteria.
I could go on…
But I’ll just ask, “What in the world is going on?”
WHO are polluting our children’s minds and WHY are they doing this?
Depicting white males as already ‘advanced’ when I’ve seen so many work tirelessly to achieve their goals.
Depicting women and blacks as “less-than”. Wow! That’s a stupid and racist message.
Depicting ‘advancement’ narrowly as the “buying of a degree” (That’s all it amounts to in most cases.)
Depicting that our needs for assistance should be measured by our immutable traits not by our individual situations.
Why don’t we think for a change? Let’s consider who benefits from such messages.
Not white males… they’re ‘privileged’, so “you’re on your own guys”. We’ll even let people cut in line before you for jobs.
Not females…if they embrace the nonsense in the diagram, they may resent men especially ‘white men’ for having some made-up advantages. Oh yes, and ‘educated’ women resoundingly consider black people as so disadvantaged without them, that they are empowered to “tell them just what they need” because they know better. How condescendingly ‘kind’ are those ‘educated women?
Not black children… they’re harmed the most. They can’t (and told they shouldn’t) believe in their own potential when it’s clear they’re going to need a lot of help. Some may not even try with those ‘oppressive’ odds.
The only people who benefit are those who want to expand government and control outcomes. They don’t even use their own money but thinking up ‘equity’ programs while using taxpayer funds (and hiring family members) is their favorite pastime. It makes people appreciate the NEED for them, you know.
They (government bureaucrats and Marxist activists) purposefully disrupt our constitutional order of an “equal chance” to “pursue happiness” and sell a divisive message ending with “You need our help. We’re here to help.” because we’re the ‘nice’ guys.
That’s the best description of “authoritarian” control I’ve ever heard. Please “wake-up”. We’re not each other’s adversaries but those suggesting we are, aren’t looking out for you. Beware of the term “equity”, it’s a trick.
11 thoughts on “Unanswered Question: Why don’t we think for a change?”
Praiseworthy one from you. Thanks.
I actually saw that comic differently than you. The diploma and the use of books made me also think of school. But it made me think of loans. The equality block means that all three get an equal amount in their loans; but things aren’t equal, ever. The tallest kid comes from a family that makes the most money within the level set to qualify, therefore, his ability to dedicate more time to just studying guarantees his success more easily than the smallest child who will have to work two or three jobs while going to school and may not make it to where they are trying to go because of it. With the equity slide, they are offering the amount of money needed for all three to have an equal share of chance. No one has to work more than one job to get through school, and all three can thrive because the chance is there. I recognize the race/gender images, but I don’t see them meaning the same as you do. I just took them for the “stereotypical” meanings. White males, on average, theoretically have it slightly easier than the other two groups, therefore the images are portraying that. It’s a lazy way to get a message across as it allows for degrees of meaning, but it exists and was used here. That’s my take anyway.
Thanks for commenting! I was hoping for that explanation.
Let’s put our thinking caps on again.
First, assuming people’s affluence according to skin tone is a blatant over-simplification leaning a bit toward a racist one.
But let’s work with that anyway.
Assuming that the white family has more money. Wouldn’t asking why that happened be a good question?
It isn’t like white people are handed money. Some may inherit it, but most don’t. (Obama’s kids will be inheriting a few bucks.)
So why might black kids be disadvantaged monetarily a lot? Are white people raping and pillaging them or blocking them from getting to the bank? No.
(Inner city legislators are “stealing” their chances, though, by condemning them to remain in abysmal schools. Makes me wonder …”Why are they against school choice for them?”)
The people disadvantaging them (in the case of many poor blacks) are the adults in their lives and the people who say they’re trying to help them too.
Somewhere around 70% of black children are born to single women. Is that the white family’s fault? Of course not.
We all know households with only one income are disadvantaging the kids from the start. I feel bad for them too. But who is responsible for fatherless homes? White people? The mayors? Our federal government? The last one is actually partially responsible. It’s generousness (with all our money) encourages women to stay single. It’s one of many of their “helping” to stay “Needed” plans.
The adult decisions in all our kids’ lives are ultimately responsible for their chances of becoming responsible able adults. (I didn’t say “successful” because there are all kinds of success stories and all kinds of success.) It isn’t money or a degree that ultimately determines them. A wonderful strategy for success for all young people is to not have children before you can provide an optimal environment for them on your own. You don’t need to be rich, but stability would be nice.
White males don’t have “an easier time”, they work, study, and persevere and are encouraged to by their parents. Lucky kids. A model that everyone would be wise to adopt. In fact, white males are currently being told to ‘step to the back’ of the line with Affirmative Action.
All that I have told you is true. All that I have told you is uneven. By artificially making things “even”, means “new” people are being discriminated against. This includes taxpayers who have to pay for other peoples’ bad decisions. No one is inspired to currently seek a solution to “What’s actually going on.” and FIX IT. The equity programs are simply “buckets” used to bail out a sinking boat rather than patching the hole. They are unfair, unconstitutional, and counterproductive to making everyone better. The fact that it makes racial groups resent each other is a wonderful perk to those who want to control all of us. That’s my take. Thanks again!
I will comment more in depth shortly; I am not at home so my brain is scattered.
However, I wanted to point out that I did not say that race was a factor in this, and I actually agree that using the lazy way (black child more disadvantaged) was in fact grotesque.
However, for the purposes of a stupid graphic, the lazy way does get a point across without having to go into details. Basically a comic vs a novel.
As for taxpayers having to pay for other people’s poor decisions, we shall disagree with this. For the love of Pete, WHO GETS TO HAVE DECISIONS ANYMORE? As a white woman, I certainly don’t. I can’t decide the most basic of basics: whether or not I want to have a child! I am told that a fetus is more important than I am, so I have to have it, even if it could kill me. Fine. Now I’m poor, have a child I didn’t even want, require assistance and am told my bad choices shouldn’t be other people’s problems. The only choice I made was to have a job and have the nerve to walk out to my car, alone, at night, after a long shift. Now, I can’t afford a decent place to live, I have a child, no health care because I still work, and the local school is garbage with ten kids sharing one text book because that’s just how it worked out. Assuming my kid manages to figure out how to get a semi-decent education despite the odds, they get to also dodge bullets while trying to get said education because the rights of the gun are more important than the rights of the child that had all of the rights until it took its first breath. Let’s assume that my child managed to be one of the lucky ones and survived school, they are still in an area with little to no opportunity. The only chance is college, something that no matter how hard I work I can’t give that child without them having to carry 3 jobs. So, in a life preordained to be blessed for it is in the “best country in the world,” my child will suffer for its entire life because… why, exactly? I can’t understand it. It’s not about race or gender, it’s about circumstance. Circumstances which are more and more outside of the control of the parents, the child, the individual. Choices are being made FOR people, who are then told to “suck it up, buttercup” and “pull yourself up by your bootstraps.” Easy to say when you can afford bootstraps.
As it stands right now, I work 3 jobs. I’m thinking about adding a 4th and maybe trying to go back to school. It would be nice if nature offered another 3 days a week, but alas, she refuses. And I don’t have kids, just me, and I live the barest kind of existence. This is life, and to say that programs to help the disenfranchised are a bad thing is to ignore the population that requires help for no reason other than to assume they all have one pigment, which they don’t. I pay my taxes, and I want the money to go to things like helping people get food for their families, making sure ALL schools have text books, ensuring proper medical assistance for everyone. With what is left over, it would be nice if they patched that stupid pot hole as deep as my whole leg. As for the idiots who want to jump up and down and say women shouldn’t be able to make choices, kids should suffer silently, and guns have a place in school, well, let them run for office, but remove the ability to get paid for it. The loud mouths will go away and maybe something useful can be done.
As for the rest, I will comment more thoroughly when I get home.
I appreciate your candor. Just so I know, are we done with the “equity” topic? I’m happy to discuss anything you’d like. One at a time is best. You’ve made some good points on the many topics you invoked. Some were mixed together.
Just so I know, you weren’t raped and have had a resulting child, you just threw that in? Let me know. Thanks.
On the comment, Who gets to make choices anymore? We always have choices but sometimes none of them are easy or good ones… and sometimes we don’t have good ones because our choices. We aren’t even aware of some of our choices ending up badly. But they were, after all, ours to make.
I know a lot of women who’d stay home with their kids but have no choice to. So, their other choices are about childcare or job options or moving in with family or friends, etc.. It wasn’t always that way. Our government’s decisions are mostly responsible in that case. Everything else you want to discuss; I’ll gladly listen to.
When I was in school, it was the boys that needed the boost over the girls. In fact, boys more often than not are treated like they’re defective girls. No wonder they want to be girls (or rather, are being convinced they want to be girls).
Education is supposed to be the great equalizer, but the quality is variable. White kids learn the three R’s, Black kids learn that the three R’s are racist.
Touche’. We’re different and boys for many decades have been expected to learn like girls. Some ‘smart’ people ought to have noticed what we did. Thanks, John.
I wrote this a few years ago, and still think it’s relevant: https://thesoundofonehandtyping.com/2018/01/02/they-should-spell-it-boysterous-jusjojan/
That was a well told story. I always thought regular public school was a stagnating environment but my husband’s tales of parochial school, made me feel better. Thanks for sharing that. 😊